Jump to content

Fight Club Mafia - May your ass be kicked


Pac

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Official Vote Count:

Wombat (6) - Verb, Nolder, SMC, BG, DPR, Christine

JetFat80 (4) - JiF, CTM, Tina, Leelou

SMC (2) - Wombat, JVoR

JiF (2) - Blob, JC

JVOR (1) - Dan

Verb (1) - AVM

DPR (1) - JiF

Nolder (1) - Smash

With 19 alive, it takes 10 punches to get knocked out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if true - then my guess is Wombat's got a guilty he wants us to have, since it seems he's trying to get lynched and what not... so we can lynch wombat and likely confirm that SMC is scum, or trust wombat and lynch SMC and then let scum deal with Wombat. If he's running a play as scum, then he's got to be giving us SMC, and if he doesn't die soon we just lynch him for living too long... no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What.

That unvote could be the action of someone who doesn't want CTM revealed. Put together with the fact that you and Verbal moved to Sharrow with no explanation when CTM was the lead votegetter and I'm starting to see an interesting picture

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if true - then my guess is Wombat's got a guilty he wants us to have, since it seems he's trying to get lynched and what not... so we can lynch wombat and likely confirm that SMC is scum, or trust wombat and lynch SMC and then let scum deal with Wombat. If he's running a play as scum, then he's got to be giving us SMC, and if he doesn't die soon we just lynch him for living too long... no?

Nope. I don't have any investigation results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if true - then my guess is Wombat's got a guilty he wants us to have, since it seems he's trying to get lynched and what not... so we can lynch wombat and likely confirm that SMC is scum, or trust wombat and lynch SMC and then let scum deal with Wombat. If he's running a play as scum, then he's got to be giving us SMC, and if he doesn't die soon we just lynch him for living too long... no?

This would be a seriously liberal interpretation of the "Oracle" role. It would have made more sense to split up Cop roles, not to mention that if Wombat made it through three or four nights, his info on death would pretty much mean the end of the game. It doesn't make any sense the way he described it.

Also, it doesn't sound like he is given the the results, so he wouldn't know who is what anyhow.

This reveal stinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. I don't have any investigation results.

This would be a seriously liberal interpretation of the "Oracle" role. It would have made more sense to split up Cop roles, not to mention that if Wombat made it through three or four nights, his info on death would pretty much mean the end of the game. It doesn't make any sense the way he described it.

Also, it doesn't sound like he is given the the results, so he wouldn't know who is what anyhow.

This reveal stinks.

Ah, I misunderstood the reveal. Got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious why you don't seem willing to vote for the people you say are scummy, and instead keep following people...

It does seem like a good way to avoid accountability for one's votes. On the other hand, one could get the same result by not voting at all and nudging selected trains like you are. Who would you like to see lynched?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, nah. Don't want to kill JVOR yet after he's been away so long, even if he's scum.

Unvote vote Verbal

Feels much better.

Dan's case on JVOR was that he seemed to list a bunch of oft-discussed players in his FOS.

Your play has been to basically put your vote wherever the discussion or a strong town-leader points. Tagging along with Crusher, then Dan, who else was it you piggy-backed? Need to look...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahaha, yeah, you won't garner the same reaction from me that you did Smash last game. Try as you might, you calling people names is one of the more feeble things we see in mafia on a regular basis.

Apart from that, all I see is you trying to attach me to Wombat as "defending him" because you cannot get your head around the idea that I might encourage him because 1) his play doesn't make sense to me as a scum play, and 2) I want to see where things go.

At the moment, I'm not sure if what you are doing is the same sort of "attaching" that is symptomatic of townie play, or what I caught a couple people doing last game where they were lining up D2 lynches on D1 results BEFORE we had them.

You do realize the hilarity of that idea coming from you? In this case, I wasn't trying to draw any sort of reaction from you whatsoever, rather was making a point about how ridiculous you were acting, which was true. You want to talk about "feeble things"? This is coming from the guy who's attempt to criticize a post that dared say something negative about him was by nitpicking the choices of adverbs (which you were actually wrong about anyway, but let's not even go there).

Aside from that, I know you're infamous for making sure you always give yourself outs for every stance you take, which is why I give little merit to you having a ready excuse for taking a stance someone else disagrees with. If you don't think Wombat scum than so be it, that's your call, but don't expect it to reflect well on you when your actions are trying to defend him and then the moment you are called out on it, you immediately try to pretend like no such thing is happening. You can keep throwing things in quotes all you like, it doesn't suddenly mean they're not happening.

Of course I could turn out to be absolutely wrong about Wombat, but the difference is I'm willing to take my stance that I haven't liked his play through this point. If somebody has an issue with that (as it would seem you do), then I have to live with that and stand by it, as opposed to start giving off a list of reasons why that's really not the case and how it can't be held against me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does seem like a good way to avoid accountability for one's votes. On the other hand, one could get the same result by not voting at all and nudging selected trains like you are. Who would you like to see lynched?

There's a handful of people that I feel would make informative lynches today. CTM, BG, Dan, 80, you or SMC are all tied to observations I've made either in-thread or in-mind and could prove informative. This is not to imply I am suspicious of all of them, I just feel they would be informative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize the hilarity of that idea coming from you? In this case, I wasn't trying to draw any sort of reaction from you whatsoever, rather was making a point about how ridiculous you were acting, which was true. You want to talk about "feeble things"? This is coming from the guy who's attempt to criticize a post that dared say something negative about him was by nitpicking the choices of adverbs (which you were actually wrong about anyway, but let's not even go there).

Aside from that, I know you're infamous for making sure you always give yourself outs for every stance you take, which is why I give little merit to you having a ready excuse for taking a stance someone else disagrees with. If you don't think Wombat scum than so be it, that's your call, but don't expect it to reflect well on you when your actions are trying to defend him and then the moment you are called out on it, you immediately try to pretend like no such thing is happening. You can keep throwing things in quotes all you like, it doesn't suddenly mean they're not happening.

Of course I could turn out to be absolutely wrong about Wombat, but the difference is I'm willing to take my stance that I haven't liked his play through this point. If somebody has an issue with that (as it would seem you do), then I have to live with that and stand by it, as opposed to start giving off a list of reasons why that's really not the case and how it can't be held against me.

Someone has to stir the pot. And the Ape seems to be taking on the scummy passive style of play this game, so it's not going to be him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a handful of people that I feel would make informative lynches today. CTM, BG, Dan, 80, you or SMC are all tied to observations I've made either in-thread or in-mind and could prove informative. This is not to imply I am suspicious of all of them, I just feel they would be informative.

Fair enough. Btw, I think you should go back to your regular style. Passive = anti-town imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a handful of people that I feel would make informative lynches today. CTM, BG, Dan, 80, you or SMC are all tied to observations I've made either in-thread or in-mind and could prove informative. This is not to imply I am suspicious of all of them, I just feel they would be informative.

Other than 80 and Wombat...I'm not sure what the lynch of the others tells us...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realize the hilarity of that idea coming from you? In this case, I wasn't trying to draw any sort of reaction from you whatsoever, rather was making a point about how ridiculous you were acting, which was true. You want to talk about "feeble things"? This is coming from the guy who's attempt to criticize a post that dared say something negative about him was by nitpicking the choices of adverbs (which you were actually wrong about anyway, but let's not even go there).

Aside from that, I know you're infamous for making sure you always give yourself outs for every stance you take, which is why I give little merit to you having a ready excuse for taking a stance someone else disagrees with. If you don't think Wombat scum than so be it, that's your call, but don't expect it to reflect well on you when your actions are trying to defend him and then the moment you are called out on it, you immediately try to pretend like no such thing is happening. You can keep throwing things in quotes all you like, it doesn't suddenly mean they're not happening.

Of course I could turn out to be absolutely wrong about Wombat, but the difference is I'm willing to take my stance that I haven't liked his play through this point. If somebody has an issue with that (as it would seem you do), then I have to live with that and stand by it, as opposed to start giving off a list of reasons why that's really not the case and how it can't be held against me.

Blah ****ing blah... I didn't read any of this. You talk more than you comprehend. I'm assuming you are still trying to tell me what I'm doing. Because yeah, I'm not aware of the way I'm playing. AT ALL. Dummy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...